Reviews

Saget does it again. This too-brief set showcases his skill as a ribald raconteur. This Vaudeville is as classic as the ages, and modern in every perceivable respect at the same time. Saget shies away from no topic. I will not list them so as not to spoil the essential surprise, but they are priceless.

The crowd takes the spotlight frequently, especially a few choice audience members who at various times possess abnormally small or large genitalia, explosive diarrhea, or any sort of perverted, sand-lot nonsense, and oddly it WORKS.

Worth the hour, and 15 minutes more, if it existed.

For its time, this was likely groundbreaking. For today, it's formulaic and overwrought.

Moorehead is the lone actor in this short. She acts the role well, though she is guilty of chewing the scenery from time to time, I can only assume through the director's insistence. She was the shining light in this episode.

Sadly, the overall direction and production was a bit sub-par compared to other Twilight Zone episodes. The pacing is uncomfortable and the lighting more erratic than necessary. The special effects, albeit a product of their time, seem dime-store quality. It was a production value one would expect from a teenager with a professional actress, camera and studio, but an amateur book and vision.

Moorehead is forced to play an unrealistically invader-hating monster of a woman who, oddly, owns no more deadly a weapon than a firewood hatchet. If she is so aggressively against home invaders, if she is feeding herself alone, wouldn't she have greater firepower?

Perhaps I am jaded, perhaps I was just "lucky" to see the implications of the twist ending before it was revealed, but watching this a half-century later, I can't say this episode is anything more than quaint.

Aaron Yonda and Matt Sloan of Blame Society Films produce this series with a simple premise: drink beer, play board games, be funny. And they certainly do all three.

If you prefer polite game play and serious attention to rules and decorum, don't bother. Half the fun of this series is seeing how they and their guests will mock the game they are playing. Whether turning "Mr. Game Show" into a maniacal killer who attacks Matt for ending the game, or throwing the provided dated game material away and writing their own gags on the fly, they consistently pull out every nuance of what is laughable about each game. It is not always in derision, though; often the very thing that makes the game fun to play is used as the center of a series of humorous references and banter.

With improv comic guests such as Dylan Brogan, Brad Knight, Jason Stephens (whose impressions steal every episode in which he appears), Greg Benson and Paul Guse, you never know what's going to happen next. Just watching the four individuals playing a board game and mocking it, and each other, with the overstimulated electricity of a genius frat party, is enough to make the show a comedic success.

But they also each drink a six-pack over the course of each 2-part session. And they get noticeably inebriated. And it goes in precisely the direction you think it will. Matt gets more surly, Aaron gets more bizarre and anxious, Dylan gets more frenetic, Jason's comments become more absurd even as the impressions remain dead-on. In this way the show succeeds as an exploration of how different people manifest different drunken personalities, and it is interesting in that as well.

As it is edited from unrehearsed footage sometimes the material is inconsistent, and there are times it is less funny than just uncomfortable. But overall it's a satisfying series of interpersonal relationships, drunken debauchery, and exploration of the gamut of board games. No matter how much they berate each other, you know they are all friends at the end. And unlike much of the viral video available on the internet, so long as no one is driving home, you can, and will probably want to, try this at home.

This is NOT an Oscar contender, nor would anyone going to see it believe it would be. So there's no surprise there. So many prior reviews attack this on artistic merit. So what? Do you really look for artistic merit in a spectacle? Or do you look for an entertainment value from a property which isn't going to rival the classic comedies but is guaranteed to thrill and amuse your kids?

Bottom line: It's fun for the kids, it's entertaining on a physical level, and if the price isn't too steep for you it's worth the while.

Leslie Nielsen is indeed funny here - though not in a way that a typical adult will find funny - and Eric Idle is similarly amusing.

I saw it at the theater at the Luxor casino in Las Vegas, NV, and found it fun and no more or less than that.

A prime example of the soft core genre, in every way including lackluster acting, predictable plot lines, glamorous locations, and lots of female frontal nudity and painfully obviously simulated sex.

If it's on TV for free, watch it, why not. I saw it on Showtime. I'll be honest, I've never understood the soft-core drama genre's propensity to include the worst aspects of both the hardcore porn and the made-for-TV drama. But to be frank, I watched it for one reason only - to see a variety of female breasts. And there are a variety here, from very small to enormous. All rather nice.

When a reviewer says that four pairs of breasts - and to be fair, a MFF threesome involving female-female kissing - saves the film, I suppose it isn't terribly flattering. But it is what it is.

Watch it for free only.

From the description on the box, you'd think this was a horror movie. It is not. It is far, far worse.

I found it entertaining - marginally - to watch the antics of British thugs involved in a mob war and putting on a show starring a brothel girl. The plot is inane, the acting poor, and the ending is absolutely stupid. The wardrobe is very late 70's, and the first shots of the male lead look like Saturday Night Fever but with a nobody who can't act instead of Travolta.

What saves this movie? (If you can call it that...) The police constable is very funny. You see women's breasts. All of the fight scenes are absolutely comical - unintentionally - one lands two men in piles of trash in the alley - trash that looks suspiciously like bean bag chairs. I guess they're lucky they went out of style just then.

A bad horror flick requires certain components. A nice shot of a pair of breasts, with no relevance to the plot. A beheading, preferably one where the head rolls to someone who is in love with the recently deceased. An innocent loser who doesn't actually die in the movie, but you wish they would. At least one famous actor in a small and likely irrelevant role. A utility worker of similar individual who gets gored while one of the "stars" looks on. If you agree, Jack-o is the film for you. If not, rent Free Willy or something. If you feel plot is important, you're in the wrong genre, I'm afraid. Great for Halloween if you want to kill a few hours.

I had no advanced warning of Sixth Sense, and was frankly unexcited with the prospect of seeing Willis in this. However, I did like him in "Death Becomes Her" and it seems that death works well for this actor.

The storyline is right out of Robert Monroe, except that in this case the soul of the angel stays in the body. Instead, we are treated to Cole's visions of horror - a sight no one else is privy to. You watch with deep interest, wondering if this one can be cured - and at what cost...

Watching Willis' character follow this boy (excellently portrayed by a fine young actor I hope to see more of), we see his wife stop speaking to him and how his home life is changed. We see the boy's real fear of his visions, we learn to see him not as a monster at all, but a perfectly normal little boy who just can't tell anyone - at least not yet - why he is so tormented. His "DO NOT ENTER" tent in the bedroom is a great touch - a hiding place in so many ways. Plenty to fear here.

Most of my complaints about this movie evaporated upon the arrival of the credits. However, there is still one scene which, although not genitally explicit at all, still seemed extraneous. Just because little boys pee in a Sandler movie doesn't mean it is in. I just didn't want to watch that; although it did maintain focus, I would have preferred another way.

It is a rare movie I recommend to my friends. This one I do.